tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post4973627599049063865..comments2018-02-18T04:44:11.390+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Br*x*t and Brands – 568 days and counting – the EU’s positionRosie Burbidgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04620450399931331172noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-84796287862672992612017-09-10T16:42:07.928+01:002017-09-10T16:42:07.928+01:00Certainty is the biggest problem to be solved when...Certainty is the biggest problem to be solved when UK is leaving the EU.<br /><br />Does certainty means we should forget the UPC? <br /><br />Not a word about the UPC in the document. It is manifestly not an &quot;Intellectual property right having unitary character within the Union&quot;, as the &quot;Enhanced cooperation&quot; does not apply to all member states.<br /><br />The Unitary Patent is also not a right delivered by, or has has been <br />submitted before an Union body in accordance with Union law, as the EPO is anything but a EU institution. <br /><br />The more one thinks about this, the more one realises that the constitutional problems linked to the UPC are far from being minor. It is hight time to look at them. Look at thingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-27164917429954624762017-09-08T16:51:05.492+01:002017-09-08T16:51:05.492+01:00@ Kant - to protect rights that UK and EU citizens...@ Kant - to protect rights that UK and EU citizens currently have post Brexit and to reduce legal uncertainty. The EU position on EUTMs is the one favored by CITMA and one of the preferred options put forward by the UKIPO.Richy Gnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-54597150585939466302017-09-08T15:04:28.397+01:002017-09-08T15:04:28.397+01:00Hi Barbara, it doesn&#39;t look like the EU negoti...Hi Barbara, it doesn&#39;t look like the EU negotiators have heard of the Repeal Bill. Everyone is too busy criticising the UK position to actually pay any attention. While many are opposed to Brexit and have every right to fight against it and/or fight for what they want the future relationship to be, this has to be done in parallel with planning for the event. However, I understand parallel negotiations only apply once blackmail has been successful, so will not happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-64927194947058398792017-09-08T13:48:33.044+01:002017-09-08T13:48:33.044+01:00Does the EU have no idea what national sovereignty...Does the EU have no idea what national sovereignty means? Why should the UK provide protection to non registered designs (beyond the existing provisions of the CDPA) and PGIs, NGOs etc. after Brexit(R) if the UK government does not see a need for such protective rights?Kantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-5935083344338747792017-09-08T12:31:10.510+01:002017-09-08T12:31:10.510+01:00Anonymous, you could interpret &quot;an enforceabl...Anonymous, you could interpret &quot;an enforceable intellectual property right in relation to the United Kingdom territory, comparable to the right provided by Union law&quot; as the UK simply honouring EUTMs, although in my view it is much more likely that we (the UK) will come up with our own UKTMs to mirror the EUTMs, a process I call division to distinguish it from other processes like conversion (which is something else).<br /><br />Just honouring EUTMs and making them apply here would potentially leave the UK beholden to EU institutions including the CJEU, which the UK government is dead set against. Darren Mealehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17241082616098447019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-58922563277719544612017-09-08T10:58:49.792+01:002017-09-08T10:58:49.792+01:00The EC proposal says that the &quot;holder of any ...The EC proposal says that the &quot;holder of any intellectual property right having unitary character within the Union and granted before the withdrawal date should, after that date, be recognised as the holder of an enforceable intellectual property right in relation to the United Kingdom&quot;. <br /><br />There is no mention of dividing EU rights or creating new UK registrations and for good reason. When countries have joined the EU, we have had to deal with prior rights in those territories. The UK leaving the EU is not dissimilar. In any EUTM infringement claim, for example, we would simply have to check the filing date to see whether it is enforceable in the UK. <br /><br />The UKIPO might actually be happy to receive a significant increase in official filing fees when new UK registered rights come up for renewal. <br /><br />The EUIPO would not be so happy to lose such fees, not least as many may choose to just renew in the UK and not renew their registered EU rights in the EU27. <br /><br />And that, I suspect, is why there is no suggestion of division or creating new UK registrations. <br /><br />Like many (most?) IP disputes, it invariably comes down to money.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-8940480197520664122017-09-08T09:30:18.943+01:002017-09-08T09:30:18.943+01:00Frankyly the best option seems to be to make the E...Frankyly the best option seems to be to make the EUTMR an english law as proposed in the repeal bill. The EUTM would not go on the UK register so no transfer costs but an EUTM would be enforceable in the UK just for the UK. A certain amount of tidying up is needed. For example these EUTM should die on renewal but those applicants who really want to be protected in the UK should be able to renew to the UK register. This would mean an orderly transition and only for those that are using in the UK which a very large number find of no interest.<br /><br />What I think the UK government can do now is <b>reassure UK companies</b> that their EUTM and CRD will still be effective in the UK after Brexit. This is important for design owners as while the UK fees were high many chose the CRD route. We can see that the more accessible design system in the UK has demonstrated a higher demand - not sure whether these are UK companies - it is in my business. A CRD cannot simply be refiled like a trademark so answering this question would be a good move to provide some certainty.Barbara Cooksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15735898485265104580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-19708486509813977792017-09-08T08:14:27.454+01:002017-09-08T08:14:27.454+01:00Genuine use requirements in the UK should clearly ...Genuine use requirements in the UK should clearly not include genuine use solely in the EU-remainder, after exit day, given the perpetual nature of trade marks. This would result in EU rightsholders having a more advantageous position in terms of validity after Britain&#39;s exit than those acquiring rights in the UK after exit day, as well as blocking of UK registrations. Far more reasonable would be equivalent treatment with UK rights, allowing cancellation, on application, of grandfathered rights for reasons of non-use in the UK.NicelyNicelynoreply@blogger.com